Skip to content

Hackney vulnerable to atom-table exhaustion via unrecognized URL schemes

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 25, 2026 in benoitc/hackney • Updated Jun 26, 2026

Package

erlang hackney (Erlang)

Affected versions

>= 2.0.0, < 4.0.1

Patched versions

4.0.1

Description

Summary

CVE-2026-47067 is an atom table exhaustion vulnerability (CWE-770) in hackney's URL parser (src/hackney_url.erl). hackney_url:parse_url/1 converts every URL scheme it encounters into a BEAM atom via binary_to_atom/2. Because BEAM atoms are never garbage-collected and the atom table has a hard limit of 1,048,576 entries, an attacker who can feed URLs with attacker-chosen scheme prefixes — directly as request targets, as webhook/callback URLs, or via Location headers in redirect chains — can exhaust the atom table and crash the entire BEAM VM with system_limit.

Details

1. Scheme extraction and conversion

In src/hackney_url.erl, parse_url/1 extracts the scheme binary (the part before ://), validates it with is_valid_scheme/1 (RFC 3986 alphabet: alpha-led, <=19 bytes, alphanumeric/+/-/. body), lowercases it, then calls:

binary_to_atom(SchemeLower, utf8)

The resulting atom is stored on the #hackney_url{} record and returned to the caller.

2. Permanent atom accumulation

The validation constrains the alphabet but not uniqueness. The allowed scheme space is enormous (≈52·65¹⁸ values), far exceeding the default atom limit of 1,048,576. Each distinct scheme mints a new permanent atom. Even when hackney subsequently rejects an unsupported scheme with {error, {unsupported_scheme, _}}, the atom has already been interned and is never reclaimed.

3. Crash vector

The most dangerous path is redirect following: when hackney follows a Location header, the redirect target URL is re-parsed by the same function. An attacker-controlled server can serve a sequence of redirects — or a batch of URLs from an upstream feed — each with a fresh unique scheme, driving the atom count monotonically upward. At the limit the BEAM emits system_limit and the node terminates; recovery requires a full restart.

PoC

  1. Call hackney_url:parse_url/1 (or :hackney.request/5) repeatedly with URLs whose scheme prefixes are unique on each call: aaaa://x, aaab://x, aaac://x, …
  2. After enough iterations, observe erlang:system_info(:atom_count) climbing by one per unique scheme.
  3. At 1,048,576 atoms the VM crashes with system_limit.

Alternatively, point hackney at a server that replies with a feed of ~1M URLs with distinct schemes (or uses redirect chains with rotating schemes); the atom table is exhausted and the node crashes without the client being able to intervene.

Impact

Unauthenticated remote denial of service via permanent resource exhaustion leading to VM termination. Any application using hackney 2.0.0 through 4.0.0 that processes attacker-influenced URLs — direct request targets, webhook URLs, or Location headers in followed redirects — is affected. No authentication or special configuration is required. CVSS v4.0 score: 8.7 (HIGH).

References

References

@benoitc benoitc published to benoitc/hackney May 25, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 25, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 26, 2026
Reviewed Jun 26, 2026
Last updated Jun 26, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(49th percentile)

Weaknesses

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-47067

GHSA ID

GHSA-9653-rcfr-5c62

Source code

Credits

Dependabot alerts are not supported on some or all of the ecosystems on this advisory.

Learn more about GitHub language support

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.